@lizardoid Ups #LGF Front Page Thread Count to 20

Rather interesting title, isn’t it? I mean, who cares, right? After all, the amount of articles a blogger chooses to display on their front page is one of those trivial, purely cosmetic decisions. Every blogger, that is, except the one who runs the green football blog.

To elaborate, I think all I need to do is paste in a series of screencaps and graphics, and I think it will be obvious why this move is particularly significant, and why we can feel free to point and mock one more time.

Per Johnson, from last year (note that CJ mentions 10 front page articles):

Of course CJ didn’t explain it this way, but you don’t have to get into advanced mathematics to realize that, because of this “app”, the “views” for any given thread will increase exponentially as you add articles on the front page (all other things equal).

It’s kind of a simple, quiet and clever way to artificially bump those counters, especially since the explanation is buried in the comment section of some thread from last year, and for those who know about it, it’s difficult to explain in a single tweet. In fact, if it wasn’t for The Boiler Room Crew, everyone would believe @lizardoid and his 217,000 claim as representative of -and comparable to- the way the “views” statistics are calculated on every other blog in the ‘sphere. But as you can see from Johnson’s own explanation, it isn’t, and they aren’t. It’s been a cheat since he implemented it, and by going to 20, he just turned up the dial (a lot).

The whole of the global warming thread, not one down ding of one post, which can only mean they have a 100% loon poster group now. Any one who will not accept the truth that AGW is a fraud and stand up for truth must hide and not post or agree with the loon herd.

So many cowards and so many loons, must suck to know your one of them and that you post in that sick ass place. They have to know.

Well, Patterico had a thread linked to us about the CJ’s pageview cheat earlier this year, and Johnson did his best to ignore it. It could probably use more exposure, especially if CJ’s going to continue to use the stats gleaned this way to “brag” on twitter.

Is he lying though? hmmm…good question. It’s more like, he changed the definition of what a “view” is, just for his blog. He made it impossible to discern real views from those incremented on his counter from the “app” (the blue line in our graph is as close of an estimate as we see possible), so no one can say exactly how much it is inflated, but we know that it is grossly inflated.

In the very least, we keep these threads handy for the next time Johnson smack tweets about his “views”. We’re just keepin’ ’em honest here.

Charles is getting a whole lot of support from left wing blogs for his “menu board” clarification. Not a single left wing blog has run an article, or managed a comment about Charles’ explanation, so that means that the left agrees with Charles. So why don’t you guys just drop it? Charles won this one.

Pardon me, are we covering “Menugate” or are we covering Charles Johnson’s attempts to cheat and lie about his blog stats? If he won anything he did so by lying and cheating. You keep cheering him on. Those are important values to uphold.

He is seriously contending that every time someone loads his front page, all 20 of the “Featured” and “Recent” loozard pages deserve an incremental view-count increase, even though a bored or casual visitor sees nothing but their headlines. Since some of his buttsuckers spend their days frantically adding new “recents”, this has a huge distorting effect on his total counts.

And most people don’t scroll down 20 fucking articles on a front page when the click to see the latest Johnson beclownment.

But based on our observations, we believe he misspoke there, and these “Pages” view counters are actually incremented when you go to the front page for the LGF Pages (littlegreenfootballs.com/pages). That keeps the logic consistent.

But curiously, we also observed that this “app” is in effect when you visit the LGF “daily archives”. In other words, if you go to that button in the sidebar and pick out a specific date, every article on the page that loads has its views counter increased. (this is not true for the monthly archives, from what we can tell).

freetaxkiller :
took a gander at that loon bin a bit ago
The whole of the global warming thread, not one down ding of one post, which can only mean they have a 100% loon poster group now. Any one who will not accept the truth that AGW is a fraud and stand up for truth must hide and not post or agree with the loon herd.
So many cowards and so many loons, must suck to know your one of them and that you post in that sick ass place. They have to know.

But at least it’s not an echo chamber! Because those are bad! And only evil right-wingers have them!

Just a thought: fatso claimed he got ~2000+ RTs a bunch of times last week, yet he had only ~2-300 new followers, right? How can that be, especially since comments don’t seem to be up appreciably?

Also, I laughed at how the leftosphere has backed off from linking to Cheetoman the last few days, especially since his “menu/laptop” howler. No linkbacks to that masterpiece? They can’t be having buyer’s remorse already, can they?

I can tell you that it isn’t the way that the “views” are calculated with wordpress software (as we use here, and the gazillion other wordpress blogs); there is a separate “views” counter specifically for the front page that is independent of the counters for the individual articles. Patterico was on his case about it, and I haven’t seen any other blogger chime in and say “hey, that’s fair” or “I use it on my blog”

I think it’s safe to say that Johnson’s “app” is very unique, and isn’t widely used (if at all) elsewhere because of the very flaws that we’re pointing out. That is, the more threads there are on the front page, the more those counters will exponentially increase. As he stated, it’s a custom-made thing, and I still think that I gave him the idea:

Thanks for the reply Chen.
Your reference to how WordPress does it certainly adds “Ass” to the discussion.

Is there any way in WordPress’s set up to even allow the option of allowing a counting method similar to what Chunk has programmed, if someone wished to do so?

And, are there any other bloggers onboard that run their site on something besides WordPres, who could identify the software they use, and how the hit counts are managed by the software?

Just looking to see if it would verifiable, or an over-reach to make a statement similar to….
“Chunk, in the entire field of popular blogging software, no-one on the planet has a set-up that allows hit counts the way your home brewed kit-bash of a set up does”.

It’s clearly not. I’ve used sitemeter to count my website and CJ dropped them and seemingly any legitimate way to keep him honest. Other than someone being able to dig up something at Blogads (I’d have to imagine that they need some form of verification, but they might just be taking his counter at his word.

Surprisingly, nobody bought the Weiner Nontroversy, even though it was practically brand-new, was thoroughly documented, and was clearly the result of meticulous, painstaking detail-work you rarely find anymore. Old World craftmanshit, you’d think somebody would have snapped it up. He couldn’t give it away.

There has to be another blog somewhere in the blog-universe that is as kooky-loco as Chunky’s playpen, but I’ve never heard of or seen it. Maybe in the gaming world, there’s some mad tyrant who used to have a popular site, who suddenly switched allegiance from Playstation to Wii, and then had to behead all his old buddies one by one as they turned on him? This kid would be about 17-going-on-11, emotionally speaking. A shut-in, with some kind of rare disease that prevents him from entering the real world. That would be roughly comparable.

Oh I think he got some serious hits last week because people were wondering over to watch what remained of his credibility get shredded like a roll of paper towels in the paws of a Siamese Cat.

He’s last week’s news. We’ve reset him to ignore. He’ll be desperately trying to make some nontroversy and he’s trying to get people to engage in Twitter wars but it’s mostly trolling for hits at this point.

Another thing that is wrong but we can’t prove it is his visits counter. A visit to me means a session. Like now, I am here,I will look at a few pages and then go somewhere else. I may be back several times, “visits” during the day. On a site with content there should be many more views than visits.

If the Mean Girls of the bloggysphere would just leave Chunk alone for a few days, he could concentrate well enough to finish his magnum opus, “Why I’m Still Right After Leaving the Right for the Left, or, Just Fuck Right Off If You Don’t Believe Me!”

Every time 50 cult members load his site, that is 1000 page views. 20 reloads a day from just 50 people = 20,000 page views, which is 9% of the total. No wonder the clown believes in man-made global warming since those scientist have been doing the same numbers tricks..

The Halal Kabab* place across the highway has good gyros. No pita pockets, though. Just a nice flatbread thing. And the nice girl wears the covered head get-up, not just the scarf, so no hair in your wrap!

Good Lord, read his defense of the great menu board laptop gaffe. It is wince inducing. To paraphrase: “I just claimed that AB’s computer was in the general vicinity, not that the menu board was the laptop in question! And that must be true, because Coulter is clearly reacting to the picture!”

Ok, first of all, Nom Nom Nom Chompsky, let’s stipulate right now that of course you thought the menu board was AB’s laptop. Why else would you then claim that it was displaying the AW money shot to which Coulter was reacting? Put aside the fact that Coulter is clearly looking at the gentleman in the picture, where else would the picture be displayed to which you claim Coulter is reacting? Up in the fucking rafters? Hovering in mid air just outside of the shot?

Second, as you are so fond of telling those who you feel are wrong, own it. Don’t offer up these torturous equivocations – take responsibility and admit you were wrong. Well, not only wrong, but spectacularly, laughably wrong. But so what? You fucked up, now admit it and move on. Did you learn nothing from Weiner? Nothing? The more you try to dance around the fact that you made a complete ass of yourself, the worse it’s going to look for you.

“The Menu Board Assumption” – there’s a title to rope in the rubes! Who could resist clicking on that? And who could stop reading once they realize what a fascinating subject he’s chosen to obsess about.

Stay tune, he might get another seven or eight comments out of that tweet.

I just swung by the stalker blog to see if they were discussing the debate tonight (whoops forgot they only stalk there). Rather than anything substantial, they are spending their time claiming that LGF’s page counter is fraudulent. Most obvious case of needing a hobby I’ve ever seen in my life.

Alexzander, why should we be discussing debates? Did you check the knitting and quilting blogs to see if they give a shit about debates?

How about the vintage Volkswagen forum? No mention of GOP debates either?

Alex – how fucking dumb are you? This is the site that makes fun of Charles (and yeah, we occasionally will discuss something else). Check out the Blogmocracy – they will discuss the debates and all kinds of good topics that are over your head.

Charles F. Johnson: Look at Breitbart, waving his laptop around aimlessly! How irresponsible of him.

LGF Posters: [Silence]

Charles F. Johnson: I’ve just been informed that one of Breitbart’s associates have claimed that I said a restaurant menu board was a laptop. Let me be clear: I never said it was a computer. I never even mentioned it!

Maybe we should ask Charles what”s on the menu and see if he even notices the dig. By any chance, do we know which restaurant that is? Is it in LA? If we can track it down I would be happy to take a picture of the menu for the DoD.

You mean he’s STILL insisting that that is an open laptop and not a menu kiosk? Even after someone took a picture of the kiosk in broad daylight, and everyone says look you stupid idiot, it’s a menu kiosk.

I’d call him a fucking moron, but it’s an insult to fucking morons everywhere.

Dear State of California: Please, for the love of all that still may be good about our trial system, DO NOT EVER call this lamebrain for jury duty. Between the free food, a place to go everyday and the total inability to any type of deductive reasoning, he’ll keep those deliberations going a long..long time.

Nah; at first he dug in, and stood by his story. Then he flipped around, and he’s now trying to claim that he never, ever said it was a laptop, and claimed that by “computer” he could also be meaning “mobile phone”. Ignoring the phrase he used – “Notice he’s apparently using his laptop in public” or whatever.

Overall, it looks like he has about 10,000 front page loads per day lately if you take 2,3 or 4, 24 hour periods and divide by the average article view count that’s been up for that length of time, right?

But I, for instance on the days I fell like submitting myself to the crap over there, will load the front page probably 5-10 times, easy, just from his twitter feed. So the actual unique viewer count must be extremely lower than even 10,000 people a day. Is that right? But he makes it sound like 200,000 people read his blog every day. Wow.

Mandingo Warrior :Maybe we should ask Charles what”s on the menu and see if he even notices the dig. By any chance, do we know which restaurant that is? Is it in LA? If we can track it down I would be happy to take a picture of the menu for the DoD.

The phone thing is beyond a stretch. All modern phones are computers. Not all computers are phones. You don’t call a phone a computer. What a transparent fool.

Hey. Your computer’s ringing. Should I get it?

Well, then I’m confused – I found this quote by Charles over at BigJournalism:

“One of those people was right wing flamethrower Ann Coulter. Here’s Anthony’s photo of Coulter reacting to the picture; notice that his computer is apparently there, but Breitbart is nowhere to be seen.”

So, he’s now trying to say when he said “computer” he meant cell phone? Oh yeah, those terms are interchangeable. Whenever my son asks if he can use the computer I always toss him my iPhone.

It’s also not clear to me what he’s talking about then he says “notice that his computer is apparently there”. Is the evidence Counter’s reaction? Pretty weak. Maybe the guy just told her about what a fool Chuck is, and she thought that was funny. He’s done enough risible things in the past two weeks for a comedy routine.

How would Chuck know whether AB is there just behind the camera or not? If you can’t see the “computer” that holds the weenie pic nor AB, then how do you know one is apparently there, (said computer) and one (AB) apparently isn’t.

Whatever :
The phone thing is beyond a stretch. All modern phones are computers. Not all computers are phones. You don’t call a phone a computer. What a transparent fool.
Hey. Your computer’s ringing. Should I get it?

Well, then I’m confused – I found this quote by Charles over at BigJournalism:
“One of those people was right wing flamethrower Ann Coulter. Here’s Anthony’s photo of Coulter reacting to the picture; notice that his computer is apparently there, but Breitbart is nowhere to be seen.”
So, he’s now trying to say when he said “computer” he meant cell phone? Oh yeah, those terms are interchangeable. Whenever my son asks if he can use the computer I always toss him my iPhone.

snowcrash :
Pardon me, are we covering “Menugate” or are we covering Charles Johnson’s attempts to cheat and lie about his blog stats? If he won anything he did so by lying and cheating. You keep cheering him on. Those are important values to uphold.

Ahh, it feels good to laugh like that. It’s why we enjoy Chunky’s Comedy Of Errors so much. With this economy, and this empty-suit in office, we need to laugh. And laugh hard, with much scheudenfraude!

Who was the brilliant PR dude who came up with “Heat” as the best possible name for a sports team? Yeah, I needed another reminder of why I’d rather go straight to hell than ever voluntarily visit a swampy place where all the people too crazy for California end up.

From one of Icesleazel’s ‘pages’, this is all too rich: “In my tour of the wingnut sphere I’ve been finding lots of homophobes claiming that Abedin is Hillary Clinton’s lover.” I wonder where she might have gotten that idea?

They really do deserve each other. Once again, I have to ask a question — how does speculating the possibility of a lesbian love affair between Hillary and Huma translate into one being a homophobe? For fuck’s sake.

Chucky fails again. The Judge ruled that the film An Inconvenient Truth should not be shown stand alone because of the errors contained.Anyone showing it stand alone format in schools would in, fact be breaking the law.

Now Chucky is bending over backwards for al gore!

@DLoesch Did the British judge order the film not to be shown? That's what you said. Were you mistaken, or deliberately lying?

Oh, for Pete’s sake. HAHAHAHAHA! I read his ridiculous spin on what he says he ‘meant’ & laughed my head off. He’s done this before when cornered on something stupid he’s said/inferred. His blustering is asinine.

How about scrapping this article and building it back from the ground up? It’s been a long time since I edited this article, and coming back it looks more disjointed than ever. I think this is an article that could seriously benefit from a complete overhaul. Look, there is something very unique about Little Green Footballs. It is a web site that went from virulently political right to virulently political left. This wasn’t just small shift, the web site has a very angry tone, and doesn’t do anything in moderation; it goes for broke on it’s ideological opponents. It’s extremely rare for any popular political pundit or website to change it’s point of view so drastically; in fact I can’t think of a single example of another pundit that has ever done this. But the problem is, this woudln’t be easily apparent to anyone reading the article for the first time. The terms “centrist” or even “center-left” very poorly describe someone who runs so hard in one political direction, and then years later just as hard in the other. The “recurring themes” are one example. Johnson no longer mentions Rachel Corrie, or “Palestinian child abuse”. Similarly, he said nothing about creationism or ID before 2007, but the article makes it sound as if these are all happening at the same time. Of course, there was the very early period where it was just a blog about bicycling. Perhaps one solution would be to divide the article into sections: pre-2001, 2001-2008, 2008 until today. What do you all think? BuboTitan (talk) 18:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Mandingo Warrior :Maybe we should ask Charles what”s on the menu and see if he even notices the dig. By any chance, do we know which restaurant that is? Is it in LA? If we can track it down I would be happy to take a picture of the menu for the DoD.

I already know what they have. Grilled weiner and Chuck roast.

Ah, but it’s a medium sized svelte weiner with Cheeto dust glaze served in an oversized bleached white bun. Orange ajoli is available if requested and best served up with a vintage Chimay to wash it all down.

The Chuck Roast is quite tender (as it’s been slow roasted for the last week) and comes with weak sauce and a slathering of ball-samic vinagrette with a cheeto ajou.

Ga-hork is not a common thing to blurt. Google says it has only been blurted by onlu a few people ever on the internet.

Once was by Eric on a vintage scooter forum.

On August 25, 2006 Peter Kaukonen an aging pony tailed guitarist uttered it on his blog.

JoelRCarroll said it on a forum that appears to be broken at the moment.

One instance in a foreign language on a xanga site.

Twice on a site in Finland (What is with this Finland connection I have all the time… Nightwish!)

That is it! The sum total. “Ga-hork!” is not a common thing for anyone to blurt. Oh wait, there was just one other time….. 1765. No not the year, the article.
http: //littlegreenfootballs. com/article/1765_watching_less_and_enjoying_it_more

watching less and enjoying it more
Charles Johnson
Nov 29, 2001 at 7:51 am PST

Glenn Reynolds points out this UCLA study that concludes online people give less time to TV. I know I watch TV very little these days, and I agree with Glenn about the reason—because TV flat-out sucks.

And I saw a perfect example of this yesterday on CNN. One of their interchangeable talking heads was interviewing a military expert about Iraq, and after one answer the fresh-faced young newsclone blurted, “Really? Do you really think so?” Ga-hork!

But I realized something else a few days ago when I watched a government press conference. As all the reporters were asking the same questions over and over, in spite of the fact that the speaker had told them numerous times he couldn’t share the information, I realized I just don’t trust these people. They say they’re serving a higher good, keeping our government honest, blah blah. But what I saw in that press conference was naked ambition—each reporter hoping to be the one to trick the speaker into revealing something, as visions of Woodward and Bernstein danced through their heads.